State v. . Baker

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . Baker

19 S.E. 145, 114 N.C. 812

DecidedFebruary 5, 1894

StatusPublished

This text of 19 S.E. 145 (State v. . Baker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. . Baker, 19 S.E. 145, 114 N.C. 812 (N.C. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

(APPEAL BY PROSECUTOR YOUNG.) It was found by his Honor that the prosecution in this action "was not for the public interest," which was equivalent to a finding that it " was not required by the public interest." That is conclusive. S. v. Roberts,106 N.C. 662. The appellant, C. A. Young, was marked as prosecuter on the bill before it was acted on by the *Page 499 grand jury, and it was proper, under those circumstances, that (813) he should be adjudged to ge [be] liable for costs, to the exoneration of the county. The Code, sec. 737; S. v. Hamilton, 106 N.C. 660.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(APPEAL BY PROSECUTOR YOUNG.) It was found by his Honor that the prosecution in this action "was not for the public interest," which was equivalent to a finding that it " was not required by the public interest." That is conclusive. S. v. Roberts,106 N.C. 662. The appellant, C. A. Young, was marked as prosecuter on the bill before it was acted on by the *Page 499 grand jury, and it was proper, under those circumstances, that (813) he should be adjudged to ge [be] liable for costs, to the exoneration of the county. The Code, sec. 737; S. v. Hamilton, 106 N.C. 660.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 S.E. 145, 114 N.C. 812, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-baker-nc-1894.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack